Ulissi pulled

Page 5 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Oct 9, 2010
122
3
8,685
Carstenbf said:
I was wondering as well.

Wiki says (medicinal uses section) .. Salbutamol is used to treat acute hyperkalemia as it stimulates potassium to flow in cells thus lowering the level in the blood

Under hyperkalemia it says (causes section) .. Massive blood transfusion or massive hemolysis

So I was wondering if it could be used to mess with the blood values in order to mask transfusions. Just thinking out loud here.
Very likely.
 
Carstenbf said:
I was wondering as well.

Wiki says (medicinal uses section) .. Salbutamol is used to treat acute hyperkalemia as it stimulates potassium to flow in cells thus lowering the level in the blood

Under hyperkalemia it says (causes section) .. Massive blood transfusion or massive hemolysis

So I was wondering if it could be used to mess with the blood values in order to mask transfusions. Just thinking out loud here.
Hemolysis occurs during training/racing, and it's one of the causes of fatigue and diminished performance. So if salbutamol offsets the effects of hemolysis (i.e. diminishes fatigue from racing), that would be a performance enhancing benefit.

That said, I don't think the hemolysis or the transfusions that riders undergo would qualify as "massive" (think stabbing victim who needs 5 bags). And hyperkalemia itself probably doesn't really effect performance, so wouldn't need to be treated.
 
el_angliru said:
I wouldn't read too much into the fact that the positive sample was taken after stage 11, and not after one of the stages he won (or the TT). One common misconception is to think that when a test is negative, then the rider must be clean. Legally he (or she) is clean, of course. No doubt about it. But we've learned from cases like Armstrong, Rasmussen and many others that these riders could deliver negative tests time after time although they were still on all sorts of juice.

When a lab in 2004 made retro EPO testing of urine samples from the 1998 Tour they found two negative and one positive sample from Stuart O'Grady. When the results were published - duing the 2013 Tour - he admitted that he was on EPO in 1998 and announced his retirement. But notice that there were two negative samples (could have something to do with the samples spending 6 years in the lab, I don't know). If he'd only delivered the two negative samples - by chance or luck - then we'd all think he was a clean rider. But he wasn't! He was on EPO during the 1998 Tour. The labs only find what they're looking for, and they have to be pretty certain with a very low margin of errors.
Of course some good points about not testing positive, however in the O'Grady case there was no test for EPO at the time and it is likely riders where not trying to avoid testing positive for it and the negative tests could in this case be explained by the tests being after the festina bust and teams getting rid of their epo.
 
del1962 said:
Of course some good points about not testing positive, however in the O'Grady case there was no test for EPO at the time and it is likely riders where not trying to avoid testing positive for it and the negative tests could in this case be explained by the tests being after the festina bust and teams getting rid of their epo.
I understand why you'd think that but O'Grady's negatives actually came in the first 7-8 days, while the positive sample was from the second week. This is why nobody bought his "I only doped to prepare" BS - except the mainstream Aus media :rolleyes:
 
May 19, 2010
1,899
0
0
Dear Wiggo said:
Thanks!

It felt like the rider had only just found out in the articles read - but probably not the case.

Also kinda makes a mockery of the process that he was able to continue to ride for another 6 stages after submitting a positive sample.
According to Lampre he wasn't notified of the positive until yesterday, and he was pulled from the Giro because he was ill with fever. http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/copeland-expresses-support-for-ulissi-in-wake-of-adverse-analytical-finding

Di Lucas positive last year was from before the race started (April 29). He didn't get thrown out of the race until after stage 19 (May 24). Santambrogio tested positive on the first stage of the Giro and got to ride the whole race. Unless it is during the Olympics, with a big doping lab dedicated to only that event, it usually takes more than just a few days before a positive is announced. And even in the Olympics it took more than six days, Ostapchuk tested positive Aug. 5, but it wasn't announced until Aug. 13. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/olympics/article-2187639/London-2012-Olympics-Nadzeya-Ostapchuk-stripped-gold-medal-failed-drugs-test.html
 
hrotha said:
Correction: he claims he was suffering from bronchiospasms

How does it enhance performance? I don't know. There's lots of stuff about PED interaction we know very little about, since it's not typically the kind of thing people conduct serious studies about. What we do know is that salbutamol is used by dopers. They probably know more than both of us about what works and what doesn't.
Two puffs is nothing. Ventolin opens the airways constricted when wheezing. One puff is 100 mgms. A chronic asthmatic is usually allowed two puffs four times per day, some might double that but by then it's off to hospital. He had a huge amount in his system just like Pettachi had years ago. Salbutamol is supposed to have no effect on non asthmatics and if you take a lot of it orally it has no effect after you reach a certain level and all it's supposed to do is correct your breathing to that of a non asthmatic. Huge doses in another form must work differently.
 
Jul 13, 2010
458
0
0
proffate said:
Hemolysis occurs during training/racing, and it's one of the causes of fatigue and diminished performance. So if salbutamol offsets the effects of hemolysis (i.e. diminishes fatigue from racing), that would be a performance enhancing benefit.

That said, I don't think the hemolysis or the transfusions that riders undergo would qualify as "massive" (think stabbing victim who needs 5 bags). And hyperkalemia itself probably doesn't really effect performance, so wouldn't need to be treated.
Thanks for your reply. Yeah, as I said I'm just thinking out loud. Wrt the last paragraph, a smaller transfusion could result in increased K+ count without invoking hyperkalemia as such. Also I wasn't looking for performance increase, but rather the use of Salbutarol as a masking agent.

Anyways, further "research" proved a dead end. It really doesn't make much sense. That's what thinking out loud get's ya!

It seems Salbutarol in high doses is thought to have anabolic properties, and that seems like a much more likely explanation to me. Especially given that trace amounts can be attributed to inhaler use.

(besides the obvious benefit for astma sufferers ofc)
 
Jul 11, 2013
3,340
0
0
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lampre-merida-await-confirmation-from-uci-on-ulissi-case

A report on Spanish website ciclo21.com claims that Ulissi has received a three-month ban from the UCI, which will expire on September 22 – three months on from his last race, the Tour of Slovenia.

“Diego got an authorisation through his lawyer from the UCI to say that as far they’re concerned, he could race,” Copeland told Cyclingnews. “We haven’t heard anything official yet but we’re hoping that we’ll have news later this afternoon.”

Lampre-Merida’s medical staff has requested clarification on the matter from the governing body and is anticipating a response later on Friday. As well as seeking confirmation from the UCI, Cyclingnews understands that the team is also evaluating whether Ulissi's immediate re-activation would conform with the regulations of the Movement for Credible Cycling, of which it is a member.

The ciclo21.com report also claims that Ulissi had agreed that he would not take part in the world championships road race in Ponferrada on September 28.
Hmm...
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
BYOP88 said:
HAHAHA just when you think the sport has stopped 'jumping the shark' it does it again.
No no no it is CLEANS, i tells ya, Cookson has brought the biggest rug to the sport in a long time and swept the floor with these bad doping types.:rolleyes:
 
Jul 11, 2013
3,340
0
0
DirtyWorks said:
I'm having a little trouble with this. Was this effectively a secret three-month sanction?
From august 26th
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-set-to-decide-on-ulissi-hearing

The UCI is set to decide on whether or not to begin disciplinary hearings into Diego Ulissi’s (Lampre-Merida) positive Salbutamol case in the next two weeks, according to Gazzetta dello Sport.
Ulissi offered to undergo a “controlled excretion test” in an attempt to recreate the stresses his body endured during the stage. It is unclear whether this has occurred.
from todays article:

Ulissi underwent a controlled excretion study in Lausanne in a bid to shed further light on the adverse analytical finding
It seems a formal case was never opened, but then how can they ban him
three months? (assuming that's correct info)

On another note. Seeing as the UCI normally takes their time in these matters. How can they speed-process this case and the allegded “controlled excretion test” ? Nonetheless without opening a formal case....

This is BS...
 
mrhender said:
On another note. Seeing as the UCI normally takes their time in these matters. How can they speed-process this case and the allegded “controlled excretion test” ? Nonetheless without opening a formal case....

This is BS...
Thank you for sorting that out.

This is the UCI, a different process that appears vaguely WADA non-compliant is perfectly normal.
 
Ricco' said:
The next step towards transparency is the suspension while riding, can be very effective too.

UCI only need to monitor if the riders in question do it Betancur in Vuelta style or not.
I think they're piloting adding lead weights inside the frames as a way of the 'suspended but still racing' program. It'll work like handicapping in horses, a 1 sigma BP violation is 3kg, a 2 sigma 5kg, etc etc.
 
Why?

Didn't they both receive a provisional suspension and are awaiting a verdict from the UCI?

They should be both forbidden to race until their situation is fully clarified by the legal authorities, not riding and a few months later someone says "oh snap, you were doping and you won 10 races. what should we do? clear your body from the winning pics? photoshop the seconds in your place?".

It's also funny that is the team doctor who decides that his provisional suspension can end. That's a conflict of interest.
 
Ricco' said:
Why?

Didn't they both receive a provisional suspension and are awaiting a verdict from the UCI?

They should be both forbidden to race until their situation is fully clarified by the legal authorities, not riding and a few months later someone says "oh snap, you were doping and you won 10 races. what should we do? clear your body from the winning pics? photoshop the seconds in your place?".

It's also funny that is the team doctor who decides that his provisional suspension can end. That's a conflict of interest.
No. Ulissi was never suspended by UCI AFAIK.
 
He received an adverse analytical finding from a test (or two, I'm not remembered now) done after a stage of the Giro which exceeded the amount of Salbutamol allowed by the anti-doping code. If UCI didn't provisionally suspended them, that's the first wrong step done in this case.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY